The general ignorance of the difference between criminal law, civil law, and just plain abusiveness is sad.

When did public schools stop teaching government, civics, and replace it with ten semesters of sex education, violence and confrontation avoidance training, and so on?

[quote author=Grok link=board=2;threadid=3403;start=0#msg27327 date=1067962317]
The general ignorance of the difference between criminal law, civil law, and just plain abusiveness is sad.

When did public schools stop teaching government, civics, and replace it with ten semesters of sex education, violence and confrontation avoidance training, and so on?
[/quote]

California public schools have to teach a semester of government and economics, and each student is tested on that material.

People are more worried about their children getting pregnant at 13 than they are about their kids knowing their rights. It's a natural progression.

As a Californian student myself, I wish we had more time to study Goverment, Civics, and Economics

I take Government.

I had an american government class requirement to satisfy for my highschool graduation.

[quote author=Skywing link=board=2;threadid=3403;start=0#msg27338 date=1067971460]
I had an american government class requirement to satisfy for my highschool graduation.
[/quote]

I had one of those in middle school, then three in high school. But that was 1980.

[quote author=Trance link=board=2;threadid=3403;start=0#msg27332 date=1067964401]
As a Californian student myself, I wish we had more time to study Goverment, Civics, and Economics
[/quote]

That is what college is for :) At my school, one could take about 2 years of Gov/Econ. Many courses aren't offered partly because of college expectations.

im taking civics now, im in 10th grade

[quote author=Probe link=board=2;threadid=3403;start=0#msg27352 date=1067975639]
im taking civics now, im in 10th grade
[/quote]

Isn't civics an 8th grade course?

We have 1 year (12th grade) of civics. However, civics class here is completely different from civics class in the USA. Here it's all about whether to define Israel as a democratic or a Jewish country and other crap like that. (I tried to listen in the lessons but found it extremely difficult and gave up after 2-3 lessons)

The fact is that the public school system appears to be breeding ignorance these days. They'd rather teach you how to get out of trouble than how to avoid trouble in the first place.

Hazard you are SO right. Case in point:

When my daughter was in the 1st grade, I saw this flag flying below the U.S. flag out in front of the school. Asked her what it was for, she said it was for whenever there was no violence at the school.

Thus, the expectation set for the students was that they could barely avoid violence. Most kids will always teeter around their expectation level, so to me this made violence inevitable.

Had the school instead flown a flag for every grading period where the average grade was B- or higher, I think this sets a goal for the kids and they will achieve it most of the time.

[quote author=Hazard link=board=2;threadid=3403;start=0#msg27397 date=1067986511]
The fact is that the public school system appears to be breeding ignorance these days. They'd rather teach you how to get out of trouble than how to avoid trouble in the first place.
[/quote]

I'd like to think preganancy prevention, drug/alcohol prevention, anger management, etc. are programs that teach avoidance of trouble. They are real problems that the public school system is trying to address. Knowing the difference between civil and criminal law is not going to solve these problems.

I disagree somewhat kamakazie. Obviously, the school cannot stop young people from engaging in sexual activities so it is best they preach safety, but they don't preach the idea of abstinence nearly enough. I believe drug and alcohol education is wise too. The fact of the matter is that teachers shouldn't be the ones teaching their kids to make ethical and righteous decisions! This is the job of the PARENTS. Teachers should be there to make us wiser, not to address concerns that are best handled from parents in the first place. Obviously sexual education should be addressed in a biology-type setting where it is appropriate for a mature teenager to learn how their bodies work. A teacher in an institution of learning should not have to spend 3 weeks teaching children how to have safe sex. They should be teaching academics instead.

Grok that is perfect example of this ignorance. Teachers these days are having to set the bar too low. The fact of the matter is this: goals should always be a high bar in which the probability of reaching them is only about 50:50. For example, say you take the SAT and score a 1000. Perhaps you should say to yourself "1000 isn't up to par, I'll shoot for 1400." If you aim for that and strive for that, even if you don't reach your 1400 goal and maybe reach, say, 1320, you've still accomplished a lot haven't you? Teachers fail to set a high goal for their students and they therefore never progress past the standpoint of average, or mediocre at best. Educators need to boost the level and intensity of the curriculum and get students more activly involved, rather than just skating by being average or just barely up to par. In the real world, ignorance is NOT bliss, but you wouldn't know it by spening time in our schools.

[quote author=kamakazie link=board=2;threadid=3403;start=0#msg27416 date=1067990718]I'd like to think preganancy prevention, drug/alcohol prevention, anger management, etc. are programs that teach avoidance of trouble. They are real problems that the public school system is trying to address. Knowing the difference between civil and criminal law is not going to solve these problems.[/quote]

I'm sure you'd like to think that, and THAT is precisely the point.

If schools would teach kids how to read, write, and THINK, then they wouldn't need to dedicate semesters to avoidance of pregnancy, violence, drugs and guns.

If they tought kids the basics of knowledge they could decide for themselves how to better govern their lives (i.e. avoid drugs and alcohol, abstain from unsafe sexual contact, etc.).

[quote author=kamakazie link=board=2;threadid=3403;start=0#msg27351 date=1067975587]
[quote author=Trance link=board=2;threadid=3403;start=0#msg27332 date=1067964401]
As a Californian student myself, I wish we had more time to study Goverment, Civics, and Economics
[/quote]

That is what college is for :) At my school, one could take about 2 years of Gov/Econ. Many courses aren't offered partly because of college expectations.
[/quote]

Aye. This spring, I'll be taking three political science classes.

[quote author=Grok link=board=2;threadid=3403;start=15#msg27429 date=1067995740]
[quote author=kamakazie link=board=2;threadid=3403;start=0#msg27416 date=1067990718]I'd like to think preganancy prevention, drug/alcohol prevention, anger management, etc. are programs that teach avoidance of trouble. They are real problems that the public school system is trying to address. Knowing the difference between civil and criminal law is not going to solve these problems.[/quote]

I'm sure you'd like to think that, and THAT is precisely the point.

If schools would teach kids how to read, write, and THINK, then they wouldn't need to dedicate semesters to avoidance of pregnancy, violence, drugs and guns.
[/quote]

This is a very modern-liberal-socialist (though not incorrect) thought - somewhat like J.S. Mill. People on their own are without reason; as society progresses, it is evident to me (at least in America) that society has rescinded from the era of thought of common good to thought of Lockean self-interest. It's no longer about "What can I do to increase my pleasure AND that of those around me," but "What can I do to increase my pleasure, ESPECIALLY at the EXPENSE of those around me?"

I shudder to think of where we are headed during my lifetime.

What textbook did you get John Stuart Mill's ideas from? He never said that people on their own are without reason

[quote author=Hazard link=board=2;threadid=3403;start=15#msg27436 date=1067998696]
What textbook did you get John Stuart Mill's ideas from? He never said that people on their own are without reason
[/quote]

I was just going to say that; it sounds like the opposite of what Mill would say.

[quote author=Hazard link=board=2;threadid=3403;start=15#msg27422 date=1067992389]
Grok that is perfect example of this ignorance. Teachers these days are having to set the bar too low. The fact of the matter is this: goals should always be a high bar in which the probability of reaching them is only about 50:50. For example, say you take the SAT and score a 1000. Perhaps you should say to yourself "1000 isn't up to par, I'll shoot for 1400." If you aim for that and strive for that, even if you don't reach your 1400 goal and maybe reach, say, 1320, you've still accomplished a lot haven't you? Teachers fail to set a high goal for their students and they therefore never progress past the standpoint of average, or mediocre at best. Educators need to boost the level and intensity of the curriculum and get students more activly involved, rather than just skating by being average or just barely up to par. In the real world, ignorance is NOT bliss, but you wouldn't know it by spening time in our schools.
[/quote]

My high school (a public one) set the standards very high. Teachers were given incentives if their students scored high on the AP tests. I'd say atleast 80% of the student body took atleast 1 AP class. In fact, my whole school district was oriented this way. My middle school education was as intense, likewise was my elementary education.

But did your school do well on the ap tests? everybody in my school could have taken ap (there's no grade requirement, other than passing the prereqs), but most of them woudl have failed it.

Also, how smart somebody is doesn't necessarely have to do with how high their marks are, although marks tend to be an indication. I know a guy that did rather poorly in school because he was lazy and didn't try, took no ap classes, and is exactly where I am now (3rd year honours CS).

So you're either saying he is actually smart, or you are actually dumb :P

I'm in IB does that count? :o

[quote author=iago link=board=2;threadid=3403;start=15#msg27533 date=1068057436]
But did your school do well on the ap tests? everybody in my school could have taken ap (there's no grade requirement, other than passing the prereqs), but most of them woudl have failed it.

Also, how smart somebody is doesn't necessarely have to do with how high their marks are, although marks tend to be an indication. I know a guy that did rather poorly in school because he was lazy and didn't try, took no ap classes, and is exactly where I am now (3rd year honours CS).
[/quote]

I think that is because the school does not challenge the student enough. I had a 1.12 GPA or something similar to that during my first three years of high school. During the first few months of my senior year I continued with that GPA then got it up to a 3.6 for the first semester and a 4.0 for the second. This wasn't because of the curriculum getting more challenging, but it was because of the lack of challenge that I did have such a low GPA. I personally do not like to do 2+ hours of homework when it requires very little thought. Therefore I did not do the homework and barely passed.

I also do not quite agree with the whole, teach kids and they won't have sex or do drugs thing. I have always been very capable of knowing right from wrong, and making the best decisions based on the facts, yet I got into drugs. This was not because I was dumb and didn't know better. It was because of family problems, and me not caring anymore. Then of course I got addicted and my life went to hell. I think home is were those type problems need to be solved. Schools just need to help excel the learning process of those people capable. I believe most people are capable of this, and the ones that aren't that's fine. If not academically they will be successful somewhere if they try.

[quote author=iago link=board=2;threadid=3403;start=15#msg27533 date=1068057436]
But did your school do well on the ap tests? everybody in my school could have taken ap (there's no grade requirement, other than passing the prereqs), but most of them woudl have failed it.

Also, how smart somebody is doesn't necessarely have to do with how high their marks are, although marks tend to be an indication. I know a guy that did rather poorly in school because he was lazy and didn't try, took no ap classes, and is exactly where I am now (3rd year honours CS).
[/quote]

Yes our school did rather well on the AP tests. Most of my friends got 5s on almost every AP test they took. The "not so smart" ones atleast got 3s. I've never heard of anyone getting anything lower than a 3.

[quote author=Hazard link=board=2;threadid=3403;start=15#msg27436 date=1067998696]
What textbook did you get John Stuart Mill's ideas from? He never said that people on their own are without reason
[/quote]

My point was that Mill said people had to learn reason, that it was not inherent (as Locke said).